본문 바로가기 주메뉴로 바로가기
All
TITLE Supreme Court en banc Decision 2015Du295 Decided November 19, 2015【Revocation of Disposition Restricting Operating Hours, etc.】 [full Text]
Summary
[1] Where a subsequent disposition pertains to partially adding, withdrawing, and changing the contents ― which are not by nature indivisible with other contents ― of a previous administrative disposition based on the premise that the previous disposition is valid, whether the previous disposition can be subject to appeal litigation (affirmative); Where there is a subsequent disposition pertaining to changing the contents of a previous disposition, how the court finalizes an administrative disposition subject to appeal litigation

[2] Whether superstores should be considered as a whole ― depending on the form of establishment and registration ― to determine whether they constitute a large retailer subject to regulation (such as restriction in operating hours) pursuant to Article 12-2(1) through (3) of the former Distribution Industry Development Act (affirmative in principle)

[3] Where a person who opened a superstore (“operator”) subject to restrictions of operating hours, etc. operates directly-run stores as well as leased stores, whether the leased store operator (“lessee”) is subject to disposition separate from the operator (negative)

[4] Matters to consider when determining whether an administrative agency’s disposition on restricting operating hours and designating mandatory closing dates pursuant to Article 12-2(1) through (3) of the former Distribution Industry Development Act is an excess or abuse of discretionary power
Prev Supreme Court Decision 2014Du335 Decided November 26, 2015【Revocation of Imposition of Corporate Tax, etc.】
Next Supreme Court Decision 2014Da81542 Decided November 17, 2015【Insurance Proceeds】
219 Seocho-daero,Seocho-gu,Seoul 06590,Republic of Korea 02-3480-1100